4.7 Article

Degradation of proteins by enzymes exuded by Allium porrum roots-A potentially important strategy for acquiring organic nitrogen by plants

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 47, 期 10, 页码 919-925

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2009.05.010

关键词

Organic nitrogen; Plant nitrogen nutrition; Plant roots; Protease exudation

资金

  1. Academy of Finland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nitrogen is one of the crucial elements that regulate plant growth and development. It is well-established that plants can acquire nitrogen from soil in the form of low-molecular-mass compounds, namely nitrate and ammonium, but also as amino acids. Nevertheless, nitrogen in the soil occurs mainly as proteins or proteins complexed with other organic compounds. Proteins are believed not to be available to plants. However, there is increasing evidence to suggest that plants can actively participate in proteolysis by exudation of proteases by roots and can obtain nitrogen from digested proteins. To gain insight into the process of organic nitrogen acquisition from proteins by leek roots (Allium porrum L cv. Bartek), casein, bovine serum albumin and oxidized B-chain of insulin were used: their degradation products, after exposure to plant culture medium, were studied using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Casein was degraded to a great extent, but the level of degradation of bovine serum albumin and the B-chain of insulin was lower. Proteases exuded by roots cleaved proteins, releasing low-molecular-mass peptides that can be taken up by roots. Various peptide fragments produced by digestion of the oxidized B-chain of insulin suggested that endopeptidase, but also exopeptidase activity was present. After identification, proteases were similar to cysteine protease from Arabidopsis thaliana. In conclusion, proteases exuded by roots may have great potential in the plant nitrogen nutrition. (C) 2009 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据